Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 8 / Friday, January 11, 2013 / Notices 2371 

Research Areas, while the Groundfish 

Committee will recommend specific 

spatial management options to achieve 

groundfish objectives in the Habitat 

Amendment. In the absence of 

Groundfish Committee 

recommendations, the Council will 

receive an update from the Closed Area 

Technical Team and a summary of 

committee progress. The full Council 

will direct it attention to providing 

guidance to both committees about 

reconciling the two sets of options and 

identify next steps. The selection of 

alternatives to be analyzed in a Draft 

Environmental Impact Statement will 

take place at the Council’s April 2013 

meeting. 

Although other non-emergency issues 

not contained in this agenda may come 

before this Council for discussion, those 

issues may not be the subjects of formal 

action during this meeting. Council 

action will be restricted to those issues 

specifically listed in this notice and any 

issues arising after publication of this 

notice that require emergency action 

under section 305(c) of the MagnusonStevens Act, provided that the public 

has been notified of the Council’s intent 

to take final action to address the 

emergency. 

Special Accommodations 

This meeting is physically accessible 

to people with disabilities. Requests for 

sign language interpretation or other 

auxiliary aids should be directed to Paul 

J. Howard (see ADDRESSES) at least 5 

days prior to the meeting date. 

Dated: January 8, 2013. 

Tracey L. Thompson, 

Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable 

Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2013–00396 Filed 1–10–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

RIN 0648–XC436 

Pacific Fishery Management Council; 

Public Meeting 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice, public meeting. 

SUMMARY: The Pacific Fishery 

Management Council (Pacific Council) 

will convene a conference call of its 

Coastal Pelagic Species Management 

Team (CPSMT) and Coastal Pelagic 

Species Advisory Subpanel (CPSAS). A 

listening station will be available at the 

Pacific Council offices for interested 

members of the public, and there may 

be opportunities to attend the meeting 

remotely. 

DATES: The conference call will be held 

Tuesday, January 29, 2013, from 2 p.m. 

to 4 p.m. 

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held 

via conference call, with a public 

listening station available at the Pacific 

Council offices. 

Council address: Pacific Fishery 

Management Council, 7700 NE 

Ambassador Place, Suite 101, Portland, 

OR 97220. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kerry Griffin, Staff Officer; telephone: 

(503) 820–2280. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The items 

of discussion are as follows: 

1. The Council’s Fishery Ecosystem 

Plan, which is scheduled to be adopted 

at the Council’s March 2013 meeting in 

Tacoma, WA. 

2. The February 5–8, 2013 Pacific 

sardine harvest parameters workshop. 

3. A plan for holding future CPSMT 

and CPSAS elections. 

4. Other items relevant to Coastal 

Pelagic Species management may be 

discussed as time allows, at the 

discretion of the Chairs. 

Although non-emergency issues not 

contained in this agenda may come 

before this group for discussion, those 

issues may not be the subject of formal 

action during this meeting. Action will 

be restricted to those issues specifically 

listed in this notice and any issues 

arising after publication of this notice 

that require emergency action under 

Section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens 

Fishery Conservation and Management 

Act, provided the public has been 

notified of the CPSMT’s intent to take 

final action to address the emergency. 

Special Accommodations 

This listening station is physically 

accessible to people with disabilities. 

Requests for sign language 

interpretation or other auxiliary aids 

should be directed to Mr. Kris 

Kleinschmidt, at (503) 820–2280, at 

least 5 days prior to the meeting date. 

Dated: January 8, 2013. 

Tracey L. Thompson, 

Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable 

Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2013–00397 Filed 1–10–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

RIN 0648–XA933 

Taking of Marine Mammals Incidental 

to Specified Activities; Construction of 

the East Span of the San FranciscoOakland Bay Bridge 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice of issuance of an 

incidental harassment authorization. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with provisions 

of the Marine Mammal Protection Act 

(MMPA) as amended, notification is 

hereby given that an Incidental 

Harassment Authorization (IHA) has 

been issued to the California 

Department of Transportation 

(CALTRANS) to take small numbers of 

California sea lions, Pacific harbor seals, 

harbor porpoises, and gray whales, by 

harassment, incidental to construction 

of a replacement bridge for the East 

Span of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay 

Bridge (SF–OBB) in California. 

DATES: This authorization is effective 

from January 8, 2013, until January 7, 

2014. 

ADDRESSES: A copy of the application, 

IHA, and/or a list of references used in 

this document may be obtained by 

writing to P. Michael Payne, Chief, 

Permits, Conservation and Education 

Division, Office of Protected Resources, 

National Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 

East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 

20910. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Shane Guan, NMFS, (301) 427–8418, ext 

137, or Monica DeAngelis, NMFS, (562) 

980–3232. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the 

MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) direct 

the Secretary of Commerce to allow, 

upon request, the incidental, but not 

intentional, taking of small numbers of 

marine mammals by U.S. citizens who 

engage in a specified activity (other than 

commercial fishing) within a specified 

geographical region if certain findings 

are made and either regulations are 

issued or, the taking is limited to 

harassment, notice of a proposed 

authorization is provided to the public 

for review. 

Permission shall be granted if NMFS 

finds that the taking will have a 

negligible impact on the species or 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with 

2372 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 8 / Friday, January 11, 2013 / Notices 

stock(s) and will not have an 

unmitigable adverse impact on the 

availability of the species or stock(s) for 

certain subsistence uses and if the 

permissible methods of taking and 

requirements pertaining to the 

mitigation, monitoring, and reporting of 

such taking are set forth. NMFS has 

defined ‘‘negligible impact’’ in 50 CFR 

216.103 as ‘‘* * * an impact resulting 

from the specified activity that cannot 

be reasonably expected to, and is not 

reasonably likely to, adversely affect the 

species or stock through effects on 

annual rates of recruitment or survival.’’ 

Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA 

established an expedited process by 

which citizens of the United States can 

apply for an authorization to 

incidentally take small numbers of 

marine mammals by harassment. Except 

with respect to certain activities not 

pertinent here, the MMPA defines 

‘‘harassment’’ as ‘‘any act of pursuit, 

torment, or annoyance which (i) has the 

potential to injure a marine mammal or 

marine mammal stock in the wild [Level 

A harassment]; or (ii) has the potential 

to disturb a marine mammal or marine 

mammal stock in the wild by causing 

disruption of behavioral patterns, 

including, but not limited to, migration, 

breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or 

sheltering [Level B harassment].’’ 

Section 101(a)(5)(D) establishes a 45- 

day time limit for NMFS review of an 

application followed by a 30-day public 

notice and comment period on any 

proposed authorizations for the 

incidental harassment of small numbers 

of marine mammals. Within 45 days of 

the close of the comment period, NMFS 

must either issue or deny issuance of 

the authorization. 

Summary of Request 

On October 19, 2011, CALTRANS 

submitted a request to NOAA requesting 

an IHA for the possible harassment of 

small numbers of California sea lions 

(Zalophus californianus), Pacific harbor 

seals (Phoca vitulina richardsii), harbor 

porpoises (Phocoena phocoena), and 

gray whales (Eschrichtius robustus) 

incidental to construction associated 

with a replacement bridge for the East 

Span of the SF–OBB, in San Francisco 

Bay (SFB), California. The proposed 

construction activities would last for 

approximately three years, starting 

2013. After receiving NMFS comments 

on the IHA application regarding 

proposed monitoring measures, 

CALTRANS submitted a revised IHA 

application on April 23, 2012. The 

action discussed in this document is 

based on CALTRANS April 23, 2012, 

IHA application and NMFS Federal 

Register notice for the proposed IHA (77 

FR 50473; August 21, 2012). 

An IHA was previously issued to 

CALTRANS for this activity on February 

7, 2011 and it expired on February 6, 

2012 (76 FR 7156, February 9, 2011). No 

in-water construction activity was 

conducted during the period covered by 

that IHA. CALTRANS’ renewal 

application indicates that the next stage 

of the construction activities will 

involve dismantling of the existing 

bridge, which is expected to start in fall 

2013. However, some preparatory 

construction activities related to the 

dismantling may take place before the 

planned schedule. A detailed 

description of the proposed SF–OBB 

East Span project is provided in the 

CALTRANS’ IHA application and in the 

Federal Register for the proposed IHA 

(77 FR 50473, August 21, 2012), and 

there is no change to the description of 

the activities. Therefore, the detailed 

description of the proposed 

construction activities is not repeated 

here, except for certain information that 

was missing in the earlier documents. 

Supplemental Information Regarding 

CALTRANS Construction Activities 

As stated in the IHA application and 

the Federal Register notice for the 

proposed IHA (77 FR 50473; August 21, 

2012), work at the Yerba Buena Island 

(YBI) access would involve the 

construction of a small (approximately 

650 m2, or 7,000 ft2) H-pile supported 

trestle. The size of the H-pile was not 

identified in the proposed IHA. 

Discussion with CALTRANS indicated 

that it is unclear the size of the H-piles 

would be used. However, it is known 

that the contractor would most likely 

use HP H-piles, which with dimensions 

between 9.70 x 10.075 in. and 14.21 x 

14.885 in., with length between 25 and 

100 feet. 

CALTRANS also stated that it’s very 

unlikely that multiple pile driving 

would occur simultaneously. If in the 

case that more than one contractor 

would be employed to conduct the 

construction activity, maximum of two 

pile work could occur and most likely 

it would be one pile driving and one 

pile removal. 

In addition, NMFS also worked with 

CALTRANS to revise the size of the 

exclusion zones and Level B harassment 

zones due to the lack of on-site data to 

establish specific zones for driving of 

24- and 36-in piles, H-piles, and sheet 

piles. CALTRANS agreed that it will use 

the data of 48-in piles to establish the 

temporary exclusion zones and Level B 

harassment zones based on in-situ 

measurements conducted in 2009 

(CALTRANS 2009) before revised zones 

are established based on on-site 

measurements during the test pile 

driving. Likewise, for vibratory pile 

driving, if hydroacoustic monitoring 

indicates that sound levels have the 

potential to exceed the 180 or 190 dB 

SPL, corresponding exclusion zones 

will be established. The temporary 

exclusion zones and Level B zones for 

various pile driving and dismantling 

activities are listed in Table 1. 

TABLE 1—TEMPORARY EXCLUSION AND LEVEL B HARASSMENT ZONES FOR VARIOUS PILE DRIVING AND DISMANTLING

ACTIVITIES

Pile driving/dismantling 

activities Pile size (m) Distance to 120 dB re 1 μPa (rms) (m) 

Distance to 160 dB 

re 1 μPa (rms) (m) 

Distance to 180 dB 

re 1 μPa (rms) (m) 

Distance to 190 dB 

re 1 μPa (rms) (m) 

Vibratory Driving ............... 24 ............................. 2,000 ........................ NA ............................ NA ............................ NA 

36 ............................. 2,000 ........................ NA ............................ NA ............................ NA 

Sheet pile ................ 2,000 ........................ NA ............................ NA ............................ NA 

Attenuated Impact Driving 24 ............................. NA ............................ 1,000 ........................ 235 ........................... 95 

36 ............................. NA ............................ 1,000 ........................ 235 ........................... 95 

Unattenuated Proofing ...... 24 ............................. NA ............................ 1,000 ........................ 235 ........................... 95 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with 

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 8 / Friday, January 11, 2013 / Notices 2373 

TABLE 1—TEMPORARY EXCLUSION AND LEVEL B HARASSMENT ZONES FOR VARIOUS PILE DRIVING AND DISMANTLING

ACTIVITIES—Continued 

Pile driving/dismantling 

activities Pile size (m) Distance to 120 dB re 1 μPa (rms) (m) 

Distance to 160 dB 

re 1 μPa (rms) (m) 

Distance to 180 dB 

re 1 μPa (rms) (m) 

Distance to 190 dB 

re 1 μPa (rms) (m) 

36 ............................. NA ............................ 1,000 ........................ 235 ........................... 95 

Unattenuated Impact Driving.H-pile ....................... NA ............................ 1,000 ........................ 235 ........................... 95 

Dismantling ....................... ............................. 2,000 ........................ NA ............................ 100 ........................... 100 

Comments and Responses 

A notice of receipt and request for 

public comment on the application and 

proposed authorization was published 

on August 21, 2012 (77 FR 50473). 

During the 30-day public comment 

period, the Marine Mammal 

Commission (Commission) provided the 

only comment. 

Comment 1: The Commission 

recommends that NMFS promulgate 

regulations and condition them to 

require further public review if 

CALTRANS or the contractor proposes 

any substantial changes to the project 

plan. 

Response: In the Federal Register 

notice for the proposed IHA (77 FR 

50473; August 21, 2012), NMFS noted 

that CALTRANS’ dismantling of the 

existing east span SF–OBB may take up 

to five years to complete, therefore, a 

five-year letter of authorization (LOA) 

under a rulemaking may seem to be 

preferable. However, subsequent 

discussion with CALTRANS indicated 

that activities involving the existing 

bridge dismantling are likely to differ 

from year to year, and the agency may 

not be able to predict annual 

construction activities in advance. 

Further, the proposed dismantling 

activities could be completed in two to 

three years. Therefore, at this stage, 

NMFS concludes that the current best 

course of action for CALTRANS is to 

pursue annual IHAs. 

Comment 2: The Commission requests 

NMFS require CALTRANS to 

implement full-time monitoring of Level 

A and B harassment zones during all inwater sound-producing activities (i.e., 

pile-driving and removal and bridge 

dismantlement activities). 

Response: NMFS discussed with 

CALTRANS on marine mammal 

monitoring during its proposed in-water 

construction activities. As described in 

the Federal Register notice for the 

proposed IHA (77 FR 50473; August 21, 

2012) and in CALTRANS IHA 

application, CALTRANS’ planned 

construction includes an average annual 

installation of up to 635 temporary 

falsework piles, 1,925 steel sheet piles, 

and various mechanical dismantling 

activities. The extent of the work made 

it infeasible and costly to implement 

marine mammal monitoring for Level A 

and B harassment zones at all times, 

particularly since some of the Level B 

harassment zone for vibratory pile 

driving extends to a radius of 2 km. 

CALTRANS agrees to monitor the 180 

and 190 dB exclusion zones and 160 dB 

behavioral harassment zone for all 

unattenuated impact pile driving of Hpiles, and the 180 and 190 dB exclusion 

zones for attenuated impact pile driving 

and mechanical dismantling. 

CALTRANS will also monitor the 160 

dB behavioral harassment zone for 20% 

of the attenuated impact pile driving, 

and 120 dB behavioral harassment zone 

for 20% of vibratory pile driving and 

mechanic dismantling. However, 

CALTRANS will not monitor the 

unattenuated impact pile proofing, 

which only lasts for less than one 

minute. Proposed proofing of piles will 

be limited to a maximum of two piles 

per day, and for less than 1 minute per 

pile, administering a maximum of 

twenty blows per pile. CALTRANS 

states, and NMFS agrees, that the 

logistics of scheduling and mobilizing a 

monitoring team for activities that will 

last less than one minute is not 

practical. 

Description of Marine Mammals in the 

Area of the Specified Activity 

General information on the marine 

mammal species found in California 

waters can be found in Caretta et al. 

(2011), which is available at the 

following URL: http:// 

www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/pdfs/sars/ 

po2010.pdf. Refer to that document for 

information on these species. 

The marine mammals most likely to 

be found in the SF–OBB area are the 

California sea lion, Pacific harbor seal, 

and harbor porpoise. From December 

through May gray whales may also be 

present in the SF–OBB area. Information 

on California sea lion, harbor seal, and 

gray whale was provided in the 

November 14, 2003 (68 FR 64595), 

Federal Register notice; information on 

harbor porpoise was provided in the 

January 26, 2006 (71 FR 4352), Federal 

Register notice. 

Potential Effects on Marine Mammals 

and Their Habitat 

CALTRANS and NMFS have 

determined that open-water pile driving 

and pile removal, as well as dredging 

and dismantling of concrete foundation 

of existing bridge by saw cutting, flame 

cutting, mechanical splitting, drilling, 

pulverizing and/or hydro-cutting, as 

outlined in the project description, has 

the potential to result in behavioral 

harassment of California sea lions, 

Pacific harbor seals, harbor porpoises, 

and gray whales that may be swimming, 

foraging, or resting in the project 

vicinity while pile driving is being 

conducted. Pile driving and removal 

could potentially harass those few 

pinnipeds that are in the water close to 

the project site, whether their heads are 

above or below the surface. 

Marine mammals exposed to high 

intensity sound repeatedly or for 

prolonged periods can experience 

hearing threshold shift (TS), which is 

the loss of hearing sensitivity at certain 

frequency ranges (Kastak et al. 1999; 

Schlundt et al. 2000; Finneran et al. 

2002; 2005). TS can be permanent 

(PTS), in which case the loss of hearing 

sensitivity is unrecoverable, or 

temporary (TTS), in which case the 

animal’s hearing threshold will recover 

over time (Southall et al. 2007). Since 

marine mammals depend on acoustic 

cues for vital biological functions, such 

as orientation, communication, finding 

prey, and avoiding predators, marine 

mammals that suffer from PTS or TTS 

could have reduced fitness in survival 

and reproduction, either permanently or 

temporarily. Repeated noise exposure 

that leads to TTS could cause PTS. 

Measured source levels from impact 

pile driving can be as high as 214 dB re 

1 mPa @ 1 m. Although no marine 

mammals have been shown to 

experience TTS or PTS as a result of 

being exposed to pile driving activities, 

experiments on a bottlenose dolphin 

(Tursiops truncates) and beluga whale 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with 

2374 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 8 / Friday, January 11, 2013 / Notices 

(Delphinapterus leucas) showed that 

exposure to a single watergun impulse 

at a received level of 207 kPa (or 30 psi) 

peak-to-peak (p-p), which is equivalent 

to 228 dB (p-p) re 1 mPa, resulted in a 

7 and 6 dB TTS in the beluga whale at 

0.4 and 30 kHz, respectively. 

Thresholds returned to within 2 dB of 

the pre-exposure level within 4 minutes 

of the exposure (Finneran et al. 2002). 

No TTS was observed in the bottlenose 

dolphin. Although the source level of 

pile driving from one hammer strike is 

expected to be much lower than the 

single watergun impulse cited here, 

animals being exposed for a prolonged 

period to repeated hammer strikes could 

receive more noise exposure in terms of 

SEL than from the single watergun 

impulse (estimated at 188 dB re 1 mPa2- 

s) in the aforementioned experiment 

(Finneran et al. 2002). 

Noises from dismantling of marine 

foundations by mechanical means 

include, but are not limited to, saw 

cutting, mechanical splitting, drilling 

and pulverizing. Saw cutting and 

drilling constitute non-pulse noise, 

whereas mechanical splitting and 

pulverizing constitute impulse noise. 

Although the characteristics of these 

noises are not well studied, noises from 

saw cutting and drilling are expected to 

be similar to vibratory pile driving, and 

noises from mechanical splitting and 

pulverizing are expected to be similar to 

impact pile driving, but at lower 

intensity, due to the similar 

mechanisms in sound generating but at 

a lower power outputs. CALTRANS 

states that drilling and saw cutting are 

anticipated to produce underwater 

sound pressure levels (SPLs) in excess 

of 120 dB RMS, but are not anticipated 

to exceed the 180 dB re 1 mPa (RMS). 

The mechanical splitting and 

pulverizing of concrete with equipment 

such as a hammer hoe has the potential 

to generate high sound pressure levels 

in excess of 190 dB re 1 mPa (RMS) at 

1 m. 

However, in order for marine 

mammals to experience TTS or PTS, the 

animals have to be close enough to be 

exposed to high intensity noise levels 

for prolonged period of time. Based on 

the best scientific information available, 

these sound levels are far below the 

threshold that could cause TTS or the 

onset of PTS. 

In addition, chronic exposure to 

excessive, though not high-intensity, 

noise could cause masking at particular 

frequencies for marine mammals that 

utilize sound for vital biological 

functions. Masking can interfere with 

detection of acoustic signals such as 

communication calls, echolocation 

sounds, and environmental sounds 

important to marine mammals. 

Therefore, under certain circumstances, 

marine mammals whose acoustical 

sensors or environment are being 

severely masked could also be impaired 

from maximizing their performance 

fitness in survival and reproduction. 

Masking occurs at the frequency band 

which the animals utilize. Therefore, 

since noise generated from in-water pile 

driving during the SF–OBB construction 

activities is mostly concentrated at low 

frequency ranges, it may have less effect 

on high frequency echolocation sounds 

by harbor porpoises. However, lower 

frequency man-made noises are more 

likely to affect detection of 

communication calls and other 

potentially important natural sounds 

such as surf and prey noise. It may also 

affect communication signals when they 

occur near the noise band and thus 

reduce the communication space of 

animals (e.g., Clark et al. 2009) and 

cause increased stress levels (e.g., Foote 

et al. 2004; Holt et al. 2009). 

Unlike TS, masking can potentially 

impact the species at population, 

community, or even ecosystem levels, as 

well as individual levels. Masking 

affects both senders and receivers of the 

signals and could have long-term 

chronic effects on marine mammal 

species and populations. Recent science 

suggests that low frequency ambient 

sound levels have increased by as much 

as 20 dB (more than 3 times in terms of 

SPL) in the world’s ocean from preindustrial periods, and most of these 

increases are from distant shipping 

(Hildebrand 2009). All anthropogenic 

noise sources, such as those from 

vessels traffic, pile driving, dredging, 

and dismantling existing bridge by 

mechanic means, contribute to the 

elevated ambient noise levels, thus 

intensify masking. 

Nevertheless, the sum of noise from 

the proposed SF–OBB construction 

activities is confined in an area of 

inland waters (San Francisco Bay) that 

is bounded by landmass, therefore, the 

noise generated is not expected to 

contribute to increased ocean ambient 

noise. Due to shallow water depth near 

the Oakland shore, dredging activities 

are mainly used to create a barge access 

channel to dismantle the existing 

bridge. Therefore, underwater sound 

propagation from dredging is expected 

to be poor due to the extreme 

shallowness of the area to be dredged. 

Finally, exposure of marine mammals 

to certain sounds could lead to 

behavioral disturbance (Richardson et 

al. 1995), such as: Changing durations of 

surfacing and dives, number of blows 

per surfacing, or moving direction and/ 

or speed; reduced/increased vocal 

activities, changing/cessation of certain 

behavioral activities (such as socializing 

or feeding); visible startle response or 

aggressive behavior (such as tail/fluke 

slapping or jaw clapping), avoidance of 

areas where noise sources are located, 

and/or flight responses (e.g., pinnipeds 

flushing into water from haulouts or 

rookeries). 

The biological significance of many of 

these behavioral disturbances is difficult 

to predict, especially if the detected 

disturbances appear minor. However, 

the consequences of behavioral 

modification could be expected to be 

biologically significant if the change 

affects growth, survival, and 

reproduction. Some of these significant 

behavioral modifications include: 

• Drastic change in diving/surfacing 

patterns (such as those thought to be 

causing beaked whale stranding due to 

exposure to military mid-frequency 

tactical sonar); 

• Habitat abandonment due to loss of 

desirable acoustic environment; and 

• Cessation of feeding or social 

interaction. 

For example, at the Guerreo Negro 

Lagoon in Baja California, Mexico, 

which is one of the important breeding 

grounds for Pacific gray whales, 

shipping and dredging associated with a 

salt works may have induced gray 

whales to abandon the area through 

most of the 1960s (Bryant et al. 1984). 

After these activities stopped, the 

lagoon was reoccupied, first by single 

whales and later by cow-calf pairs. 

The onset of behavioral disturbance 

from anthropogenic noise depends on 

both external factors (characteristics of 

noise sources and their paths) and the 

receiving animals (hearing, motivation, 

experience, demography) and is also 

difficult to predict (Southall et al. 2007). 

The proposed project area is not 

believed to be a prime habitat for marine 

mammals, nor is it considered an area 

frequented by marine mammals. 

Therefore, behavioral disturbances that 

could result from anthropogenic noise 

associated with SF–OBB construction 

activities are expected to affect only a 

small number of marine mammals on an 

infrequent basis. 

Currently NMFS uses 160 dB re 1 mPa 

(RMS) at received level for impulse 

noises (such as impact pile driving, 

mechanic splitting and pulverizing) as 

the onset of marine mammal behavioral 

harassment, and 120 dB re 1 mPa (RMS) 

for non-impulse noises (vibratory pile 

driving, saw cutting, drilling, and 

dredging). 

As far as airborne noise is concerned, 

based on airborne noise levels measured 

and on-site monitoring conducted 

during 2004 under a previous IHA, 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with 

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 8 / Friday, January 11, 2013 / Notices 2375 

noise levels from the East Span project 

did not result in the harassment of 

harbor seals hauled out on Yerba Buena 

Island (YBI). Also, noise levels from the 

East Span project are not expected to 

result in harassment of the sea lions 

hauled out at Pier 39 as airborne and 

waterborne sound pressure levels (SPLs) 

would attenuate to levels below where 

harassment would be expected by the 

time they reach that haul-out site, 5.7 

km (3.5 miles) from the project site. 

Therefore, no pinniped hauled out 

would be affected as a result of the 

proposed pile-driving. A detailed 

description of the acoustic 

measurements is provided in the 2004 

CALTRANS marine mammal and 

acoustic monitoring report for the same 

activity (CALTRANS’ 2005). 

Short-term impacts to habitat may 

include minimal disturbance of the 

sediment where individual bridge piers 

are constructed. Long-term impacts to 

marine mammal habitat will be limited 

to the footprint of the piles and the 

obstruction they will create following 

installation. However, this impact is not 

considered significant as the marine 

mammals can easily swim around the 

piles of the new bridge, as they 

currently swim around the existing 

bridge piers. 

Impact on Availability of Affected 

Species for Taking for Subsistence Uses 

There are no relevant subsistence uses 

of marine mammals implicated by this 

action. 

Mitigation Measures 

For the issuance of the IHA for the 

planned 2012–2013 SF–OBB 

construction activities to reduce adverse 

impacts to marine mammals to the 

lowest extent practicable, NMFS 

requires the following mitigation 

measures to be implemented. 

Use of Noise Attenuation Devices 

To reduce impact on marine 

mammals, CALTRANS shall use marine 

pile driving energy attenuator (i.e., air 

bubble curtain system), or other equally 

effective sound attenuation method 

(e.g., dewatered cofferdam) for all 

impact pile driving, with the exception 

of pile proofing. 

Establishment of Exclusion and Level B 

Harassment Zones 

Before the commencement of in-water 

construction activities, which include 

impact pile driving, vibratory pile 

driving, and mechanical dismantling of 

existing bridge, CALTRANS shall 

establish exclusion zones where 

received underwater sound pressure 

levels (SPLs) are higher than 180 dB 

(rms) and 190 dB (rms) re 1 mPa for 

cetaceans and pinnipeds, respectively, 

and Level B behavioral harassment 

zones where received underwater sound 

pressure levels (SPLs) are higher than 

160 dB (rms) and 120 dB (rms) re 1 mPa 

for impulse noise sources (impact pile 

driving) and non-impulses noise sources 

(vibratory pile driving and mechanic 

dismantling), respectively. Before the 

sizes of actual zones are determined 

based on hydroacoustic measurements, 

CALTRANS shall establish these zones 

based on prior measurements conducted 

during SF–OBB constructions, as 

described in Table 1 of this document. 

Once the underwater acoustic 

measurements are conducted during 

initial test pile driving, CALTRANS 

shall adjust the size of the exclusion 

zones and Level B behavioral 

harassment zones, and monitor these 

zones accordingly. 

NMFS-approved protected species 

observers (PSOs) shall conduct initial 

survey of the safety zone to ensure that 

no marine mammals are seen within the 

zones before impact pile driving of a 

pile segment begins. If marine mammals 

are found within the safety zone, impact 

pile driving of the segment would be 

delayed until they move out of the area. 

If a marine mammal is seen above water 

and then dives below, the contractor 

would wait 15 minutes for pinnipeds 

and harbor porpoise and 30 minutes for 

gray whales. If no marine mammals are 

seen by the observer in that time it 

would be assumed that the animal has 

moved beyond the safety zone. This 15- 

minute criterion is based on scientific 

evidence that harbor seals in San 

Francisco Bay dive for a mean time of 

0.50 minutes to 3.33 minutes (Harvey 

and Torok, 1994), and the mean diving 

duration for harbor porpoises ranges 

from 44 to 103 seconds (Westgate et al., 

1995). 

Once the pile driving of a segment 

begins it cannot be stopped until that 

segment has reached its predetermined 

depth due to the nature of the sediments 

underlying the Bay. If pile driving stops 

and then resumes, it would potentially 

have to occur for a longer time and at 

increased energy levels. In sum, this 

would simply amplify impacts to 

marine mammals, as they would endure 

potentially higher SPLs for longer 

periods of time. Pile segment lengths 

and wall thickness have been specially 

designed so that when work is stopped 

between segments (but not during a 

single segment), the pile tip is never 

resting in highly resistant sediment 

layers. Therefore, because of this 

operational situation, if seals, sea lions, 

or harbor porpoises enter the safety zone 

after pile driving of a segment has 

begun, pile driving will continue and 

marine mammal observers will monitor 

and record marine mammal numbers 

and behavior. However, if pile driving 

of a segment ceases for 30 minutes or 

more and a marine mammal is sighted 

within the designated safety zone prior 

to commencement of pile driving, the 

observer(s) must notify the Resident 

Engineer (or other authorized 

individual) immediately and follow the 

mitigation requirements as outlined 

previously in this document. 

Soft Start 

It should be recognized that although 

marine mammals will be protected from 

Level A harassment (i.e., injury) through 

marine mammal observers monitoring a 

190-dB exclusion zone for pinnipeds 

and 180-dB exclusion zone for 

cetaceans, mitigation may not be 100 

percent effective at all times in locating 

marine mammals. Therefore, in order to 

provide additional protection to marine 

mammals near the project area by 

allowing marine mammals to vacate the 

area prior to receiving a potential injury, 

CALTRANS and its contractor will also 

‘‘soft start’’ the hammer prior to 

operating at full capacity. This should 

expose fewer animals to loud sounds 

both underwater and above water. This 

would also ensure that, although not 

expected, any pinnipeds and cetaceans 

that are missed during the initial 

exclusion zone monitoring will not be 

injured. 

Power Down and Shut-Down 

As mentioned previously, although 

power down and shut-down measures 

will not be required for pile driving 

activities, these measures are required 

for mechanical dismantling of the 

existing bridge. The contractor perform 

mechanical dismantling work will stop 

in-water noise generating machinery 

when marine mammals are sighted 

within the designated exclusion zones. 

Monitoring Measures 

The following monitoring measures 

are required for the proposed SF–OBB 

construction activities. 

Visual Monitoring 

Besides using mitigation measures as 

a mean of implementing power down 

and shut-down measures for mechanical 

bridge dismantling, marine mammal 

monitoring will also be conducted to 

assess potential impacts from 

CALTRANS construction activities. 

CALTRANS will implement onsite 

marine mammal monitoring for 100% of 

all unattenuated impact pile driving of 

H-piles for 180- and 190-dB re 1 mPa 

exclusion zones and 160-dB re 1 mPa 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with 

2376 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 8 / Friday, January 11, 2013 / Notices 

Level B harassment zone, attenuated 

impact pile driving (except pile 

proofing) and mechanical dismantling 

for 180- and 190-dB re 1 mPa exclusion 

zones. CALTRANS will also monitor 

20% of the attenuated impact pile 

driving for the 160-dB re 1 mPa Level B 

harassment zone, and 20% of vibratory 

pile driving and mechanic dismantling 

for the 120-dB re 1 mPa Level B 

harassment zone. 

Monitoring of the pinniped and 

cetacean exclusion zones shall be 

conducted by a minimum of three 

qualified NMFS-approved protected 

species observers (PSOs). Observations 

will be made using high-quality 

binoculars (e.g., Zeiss, 10 x 42 power). 

PSOs will be equipped with radios or 

cell phones for maintaining contact with 

other observers and CALTRANS 

engineers, and range finders to 

determine distance to marine mammals, 

boats, buoys, and construction 

equipment. 

Data on all observations will be 

recorded and will include the following 

information: 

(1) Location of sighting; 

(2) Species; 

(3) Number of individuals; 

(4) Number of calves present; 

(5) Duration of sighting; 

(6) Behavior of marine animals 

sighted; 

(7) Direction of travel; 

(8) When in relation to construction 

activities did the sighting occur (e.g., 

before, ‘‘soft-start’’, during, or after the 

pile driving or removal). 

The reactions of marine mammals 

will be recorded based on the following 

classifications that are consistent with 

the Richmond Bridge Harbor Seal 

survey methodology (for information on 

the Richmond Bridge authorization, see 

68 FR 66076, November 25, 2003): (1) 

No response, (2) head alert (looks 

toward the source of disturbance), (3) 

approach water (but not leave), and (4) 

flush (leaves haul-out site). The number 

of marine mammals under each 

disturbance reaction will be recorded, as 

well as the time when seals re-haul after 

a flush. 

Hydroacoustic Monitoring 

The purpose of the underwater sound 

monitoring during dismantling of 

concrete foundations via mechanical 

means is to establish the exclusion 

zones of 180 dB re 1 mPa (rms) for 

cetaceans and 190 dB re 1 mPa (rms) for 

pinnipeds. Monitoring will occur during 

the initial use of concrete dismantling 

equipment with the potential to 

generate sound pressure levels in excess 

of 180 dB re 1 mPa (rms). Monitoring 

will likely be conducted from 

construction barges and/or boats. 

Measurements will be taken at various 

distances as needed to determine the 

distance to the 180 and 190 dB re 1 mPa 

(rms) contours. 

The purpose of underwater sound 

monitoring during impact pile driving 

will be to verify sound level estimates 

and confirm that sound levels do not 

equal or exceed 180 dB re 1 mPa (rms). 

Reporting 

CALTRANS will notify NMFS prior to 

the initiation of the pile driving and 

dismantling activities for the removal of 

the existing east span. NMFS will be 

informed of the initial sound pressure 

level measurements for both pile driving 

and foundation dismantling activities, 

including the final exclusion zone and 

Level B harassment zone radii 

established for impact and vibratory pile 

driving and marine foundation 

dismantling activities. 

Monitoring reports will be posted on 

the SFOBB Project’s biological 

mitigation Web site 

(www.biomitigation.org) on a weekly 

basis if in-water construction activities 

are conducted. Marine mammal 

monitoring reports will include species 

and numbers of marine mammals 

observed, time and location of 

observation and behavior of the animal. 

In addition, the reports will include an 

estimate of the number and species of 

marine mammals that may have been 

harassed as a result of activities. 

In addition, CALTRANS will provide 

NMFS with a draft final report within 

90 days after the expiration of the IHA. 

This report should detail the monitoring 

protocol, summarize the data recorded 

during monitoring, and estimate the 

number of marine mammals that may 

have been harassed due to pile driving. 

If no comments are received from NMFS 

within 30 days, the draft final report 

will constitute the final report. If 

comments are received, a final report 

must be submitted within 30 days after 

receipt of comments. 

Marine Mammal Monitoring Report 

From Previous IHA 

As mentioned above, marine mammal 

monitoring during CALTRANS’ pile 

driving activities and weekly marine 

mammal observation memorandums 

(CALTRANS 2007; 2010) indicate that 

only a small number of harbor seals (a 

total of 16 individuals since 2006) and 

1 California sea lion (a total of 1 

individual in 2009) were observed 

within ZOIs that could result in 

behavioral harassment. However, the 

reports state that none of the animals 

were observed as been startled by the 

exposure, which could be an indication 

that these animals were habituated to 

human activities in San Francisco Bay. 

In addition, no harbor porpoise or gray 

whales were observed during pile 

driving activities associated to 

CALTRANS’ SF–OBB construction 

work. 

Estimated Take by Incidental 

Harassment 

Marine mammal take estimates are 

based on marine mammal monitoring 

reports and marine mammal 

observations made during pile driving 

activities associated with the SF–OBB 

construction work authorized under 

prior IHAs. For pile driving activities 

conducted in 2006, 5 harbor seals and 

no other marine mammals were 

detected within the isopleths of 160 dB 

(rms) re 1 mPa during impact pile 

driving where air bubble curtains were 

deployed for mitigation measures 

(radius of zone of influence (ZOI) at 500 

m) (CALTRANS 2007). For pile driving 

activities conducted in the 2008 and 

2009 seasons, CALTRANS monitored a 

much larger ZOI of 120 dB (rms) re 1 

mPa as a result of vibratory pile driving. 

A total of 11 harbor seals and 1 

California sea lion were observed 

entering the 120 dB (rms) re 1 mPa ZOI 

(CALTRANS). However, despite the ZOI 

being monitored extended to 1,900 m 

for the 120 dB isopleths, CALTRANS 

did not specify which pile driving 

activities conducted in 2008 and 2009 

used an impact hammer and which ones 

used a vibratory hammer. Therefore, at 

least some of these animals were not 

exposed to received level above 160 dB 

(rms) re mPa, and thus should not be 

considered as ‘‘taken’’ under the 

MMPA. No harbor porpoise or gray 

whales were observed during pile 

driving activities associated to 

CALTRANS’ SF–OBB construction work 

(CALTRANS 2007; 2010). 

Based on these results, and 

accounting for a certain level of 

uncertainty regarding the next phase of 

construction (which will include 

dismantling of the existing bridge by 

mechanical means), NMFS concludes 

that at maximum 50 harbor seals, 10 

California sea lions, 10 harbor 

porpoises, and 5 gray whales could be 

exposed to noise levels that could cause 

Level B harassment as a result of the 

CALTRAN’ SF–OBB construction 

activities. 

Negligible Impact and Small Numbers 

Analyses and Determinations 

Pursuant to NMFS’ regulations 

implementing the MMPA, an applicant 

is required to estimate the number of 

animals that will be ‘‘taken’’ by the 

specified activities (i.e., takes by 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with 

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 8 / Friday, January 11, 2013 / Notices 2377 

harassment only, or takes by 

harassment, injury, and/or death). This 

estimate informs the analysis that NMFS 

must perform to determine whether the 

activity will have a ‘‘negligible impact’’ 

on the species or stock. Level B 

(behavioral) harassment occurs at the 

level of the individual(s) and does not 

assume any resulting population-level 

consequences, though there are known 

avenues through which behavioral 

disturbance of individuals can result in 

population-level effects. A negligible 

impact finding is based on the lack of 

likely adverse effects on annual rates of 

recruitment or survival (i.e., populationlevel effects). An estimate of the number 

of Level B harassment takes alone is not 

enough information on which to base an 

impact determination. 

In addition to considering estimates of 

the number of marine mammals that 

might be ‘‘taken’’ through behavioral 

harassment, NMFS considers other 

factors, such as the likely nature of any 

responses (their intensity, duration, 

etc.), the context of any responses 

(critical reproductive time or location, 

migration, etc.), as well as the number 

and nature of estimated Level A takes, 

the number of estimated mortalities, and 

effects on habitat. 

The CALTRANS’ specified activities 

have been described based on best 

estimates of the planned SF–OBB 

construction project within the 

proposed project area. Some of the 

noises that would be generated as a 

result of the proposed bridge 

construction and dismantling project, 

such as impact pile driving, are high 

intensity. However, the in-water pile 

driving for the piles would use small 

hammers and/or vibratory pile driving 

methods, coupled with noise 

attenuation mechanism such as air 

bubble curtains for impact pile driving, 

therefore the resulting exclusion zones 

for potential TS are expected to be 

extremely small (< 35 m) from the 

hammer. In addition, the source levels 

from vibratory pile driving are expected 

to be below the TS onset threshold. 

Therefore, NMFS does not expect that 

any animals would receive Level A 

(including injury) harassment or Level B 

harassment in the form of TTS from 

being exposed to in-water pile driving 

associated with SF–OBB construction 

project. 

Based on marine mammal monitoring 

reports under previous IHAs, only 16 

harbor seals and 1 California sea lion 

were observed within the 120 dB (in 

2008 and 2009) or 160 dB (in 2006) ZOIs 

during in-water pile driving since 2006. 

NMFS estimates that up to 50 harbor 

seals, 10 California sea lions, 10 harbor 

porpoises, and 5 gray whales could be 

exposed to received levels above 120 dB 

(rms) during vibratory pile driving or 

160 dB (rms) during impact pile driving 

for the next season of construction 

activities due to the large numbers of 

piles to be driven and the extended 

zones of influence from vibratory pile 

driving. These are small numbers, 

representing 0.15% of the California 

stock of harbor seal population 

(estimated at 34,233; Carretta et al. 

2010), 0.00% of the U.S. stock of 

California sea lion population 

(estimated at 238,000; Carretta et al. 

2010), 0.10% of the San FranciscoRussian River stock of harbor porpoise 

population (estimated at 9,181; Carretta 

et al. 2010), and 0.05% of the Eastern 

North Pacific stock of gray whale 

population (Allen and Angliss 2010). 

Animals exposed to construction 

noise associated with the SF–OBB 

construction work would be limited to 

Level B behavioral harassment only, i.e., 

the exposure of received levels for 

impulse noise between 160 and 180 dB 

(rms) re 1 mPa (from impact pile driving) 

and for non-impulse noise between 120 

and 180 dB (rms) re 1 mPa (from 

vibratory pile driving). In addition, the 

potential behavioral responses from 

exposed animals are expected to be 

localized and short in duration. 

These low intensity, localized, and 

short-term noise exposures (i.e., 160 dB 

re 1 mPa (rms) from impulse sources and 

120 dB re 1 mPa (rms) from non-impulse 

sources), are expected to cause brief 

startle reactions or short-term behavioral 

modification by the animals. These brief 

reactions and behavioral changes are 

expected to disappear when the 

exposures cease. Therefore, these levels 

of received underwater construction 

noise from the proposed SF–OBB 

construction project are not expected to 

affect marine mammal annual rates of 

recruitment or survival. The maximum 

estimated 160 dB isopleths from impact 

pile driving is 500 m from the pile, and 

the estimated 120 dB maximum 

isopleths from vibratory pile driving is 

approximately 2,000 m from the pile. 

There is no pinniped haul-out area in 

the vicinity of the pile driving sites. 

For the reasons discussed in this 

document, NMFS has determined that 

the impact of in-water pile driving 

associated with construction of the SF– 

OBB would result, at worst, in the Level 

B harassment of small numbers of 

California sea lions, Pacific harbor seals, 

harbor porpoises, and potentially gray 

whales that inhabit or visit SFB in 

general and the vicinity of the SF–OBB 

in particular. While behavioral 

modifications, including temporarily 

vacating the area around the 

construction site, may be made by these 

species to avoid the resultant visual and 

acoustic disturbance, the availability of 

alternate areas within SFB and haul-out 

sites (including pupping sites) and 

feeding areas within the Bay has led 

NMFS to determine that this action will 

have a negligible impact on California 

sea lion, Pacific harbor seal, harbor 

porpoise, and gray whale populations 

along the California coast. 

In addition, no take by Level A 

harassment (injury) or death is 

anticipated and harassment takes 

should be at the lowest level practicable 

due to incorporation of the mitigation 

measures mentioned previously in this 

document. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) 

NMFS prepared an Environmental 

Assessment (EA) for the take of marine 

mammals incidental to construction of 

the East Span of the SF–OBB and made 

a Finding of No Significant Impact 

(FONSI) on November 4, 2003. Due to 

the modification of part of the 

construction project and the mitigation 

measures, NMFS reviewed additional 

information from CALTRANS regarding 

empirical measurements of pile driving 

noises for the smaller temporary piles 

without an air bubble curtain system 

and the use of vibratory pile driving. 

NMFS prepared a Supplemental 

Environmental Assessment (SEA) and 

analyzed the potential impacts to 

marine mammals that would result from 

the modification of the action. A 

Finding of No Significant Impact 

(FONSI) was signed on August 5, 2009. 

A copy of the SEA and FONSI is 

available upon request (see ADDRESSES). 

Endangered Species Act (ESA) 

NMFS has determined that issuance 

of the IHA will have no effect on listed 

marine mammals, as none are known to 

occur in the action area. 

Authorization 

NMFS has issued an IHA to 

CALTRANS for the potential 

harassment of small numbers of harbor 

seals, California sea lions, harbor 

porpoises, and gray whales incidental to 

construction of a replacement bridge for 

the East Span of the San FranciscoOakland Bay Bridge in California, 

provided the previously mentioned 

mitigation, monitoring, and reporting 

requirements are incorporated. 

Dated: January 7, 2013. 

Helen M. Golde, 

Acting Director, Office of Protected Resources, 

National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2013–00381 Filed 1–10–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with